From: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
To: Hui Su <sh_def@163.com>
Cc: bsegall@google.com, changwoo@igalia.com, connoro@google.com,
dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, jstultz@google.com,
juri.lelli@redhat.com, kprateek.nayak@amd.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mgorman@suse.de, mingo@redhat.com,
peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org,
sched-ext@lists.linux.dev, tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com,
tj@kernel.org, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, void@manifault.com,
vschneid@redhat.com, yu.c.chen@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] sched: Dispatch task ticks for donor and execution classes
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2026 19:43:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aqGa0J1_LM99oDkP@gpd4> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260909104251.3131056-1-sh_def@163.com>
Hi Hui,
On Wed, Sep 09, 2026 at 07:42:51PM +0900, Hui Su wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 09, 2026, Sashiko AI review wrote:
> > Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential
> > issue(s) to consider:
> >
> > - ## [High] Infinite timeslice and preemption bypass during SCX proxy
> > execution due to a mismatch between slice decrement (execution context)
> > and slice checking (scheduling context).
> >
> > commit ff57ff4a11692a1b0d98a6cd57257eb58a1bd864
> > Author: Hui Su <sh_def@163.com>
> >
> > Does this cause an infinite timeslice for SCX tasks during proxy execution?
> >
> > When an SCX task acts as a donor in proxy execution, task_tick_scx() sets
> > curr to rq->donor. However, update_curr_scx() applies the slice decrement
> > to the execution context (rq->curr):
> >
> > static void update_curr_scx(struct rq *rq)
> > {
> > struct task_struct *curr = rq->curr;
> > ...
> > if (curr->scx.slice != SCX_SLICE_INF)
> > curr->scx.slice -= min_t(u64, curr->scx.slice, delta_exec);
> > ...
> > }
> >
> > Later in task_tick_scx(), the slice check is performed against the donor
> > task which was never decremented:
> >
> > if (!curr->scx.slice)
> > resched_curr(rq);
> >
> > Since the donor's slice doesn't decrease, it will never hit zero, meaning
> > resched_curr(rq) is bypassed indefinitely.
> >
> > Additionally, if the proxy task is SCX but the donor is not,
> > task_tick_scx() returns early here because the donor is not an SCX task,
> > skipping the SCX tick processing completely. Should the slice management
> > be explicitly tied to the execution context rather than the donor?
> >
> > --
> > Sashiko AI review
>
> Thanks for the report.
>
> This configuration is currently unreachable. CONFIG_SCHED_PROXY_EXEC
> depends on !SCHED_CLASS_EXT, so sched_ext and proxy execution cannot be
> enabled together.
>
> When CONFIG_SCHED_CLASS_EXT=y, proxy execution is disabled and rq->donor
> and rq->curr alias the same task. Therefore task_tick_scx() using
> rq->donor and update_curr_scx() using rq->curr still operate on the same
> task, and the slice decrement and check cannot diverge.
>
> The sched_ext change in this patch only adapts it to the new task_tick()
> interface for the currently supported configuration.
>
> If sched_ext and proxy execution are made compatible in the future, the
> SCX donor/execution-context ownership will need to be handled as part of
> that integration.
They should be compatible soon:
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260831134338.1531664-1-arighi@nvidia.com/
It'd be good to handle SCX donor/execution context ownership in this serie as
well, or we can coordinate to figure out the required changes.
I haven't looked at the whole patch series yet (will do soon), this is JFYI. :)
Thanks,
-Andrea
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-09 17:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-09 9:28 [PATCH v4 0/5] sched: Handle split scheduling and execution contexts in task ticks Hui Su
2026-09-09 9:28 ` [PATCH v4 1/5] sched: Dispatch task ticks for donor and execution classes Hui Su
2026-09-09 10:42 ` Hui Su
2026-09-09 17:43 ` Andrea Righi [this message]
2026-09-10 10:49 ` Hui Su
2026-09-09 9:28 ` [PATCH v4 2/5] sched/numa: Drive NUMA task tick from execution context Hui Su
2026-09-09 9:28 ` [PATCH v4 3/5] sched/cache: Drive cache " Hui Su
2026-09-09 11:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-09-10 10:53 ` Hui Su
2026-09-09 9:29 ` [PATCH v4 4/5] sched/rt: Fix RT watchdog accounting for proxy execution Hui Su
2026-09-09 11:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-09-10 10:54 ` Hui Su
2026-09-09 9:29 ` [PATCH v4 5/5] sched/core: Fix donor slice accounting under " Hui Su
2026-09-10 10:55 ` Hui Su
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=aqGa0J1_LM99oDkP@gpd4 \
--to=arighi@nvidia.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=changwoo@igalia.com \
--cc=connoro@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=jstultz@google.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sched-ext@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=sh_def@163.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=void@manifault.com \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=yu.c.chen@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®